In the spring of 2006, Ray Wilson, an internal business systems analyst for an investor-owned utility
company, faced a monumental challenge: how to go about transferring the management of approximately
750,000 documents on paper, Mylar, microfiche, and other media from more than 150 different
facilities to one centralized location.

He was also responsible for helping to determine which documents should be retained, creating a
searchable database, and maintaining the data files that resulted from the effort.

An investor-owned utility company needed to
transfer the management of 750,000 documents from more than 150 different facilities to a centralized location.

Although the scope may have been once-in-a-lifetime, at the heart of the task was a common problem
for engineers everywhere-content management for engineering drawings.

A One-Year, Multi-Million-Dollar Document Management Challenge

In a world that is becoming more and more accustomed to electronic searching, sliding file cabinet
drawers open and thumbing through hard copy documents is antiquated. Physical documents consume
not only valuable space but also time, as locating and accessing needed drawings or specifications can
be difficult. To address the need for organizations to take advantage of Information Age electronic
storage and search capabilities, the field of document management has emerged as a specialty.

When undertaking a conversion project, an organization typically will choose either to convert all documents
right away, making the change from an existing storage and retrieval approach to a new approach, or to convert
individual documents as they are retrieved and used, gradually completing the conversion over time.

For Wilson, the decision to convert all documents at once was evident. The utility had been instructed
by its parent company to turn over document management to an independent transmission company.
Under a three-year service contract, the parent company had been maintaining the documents at a
cost of $1.5 million per year. By the time that contract would end May 1, 2007, the parent company
planned to double the $1.5 million annual fee.

Wilson had roughly one year to transfer the documents to an independent transmission company.

About the Engineering Documents

Wilson's organization and its parent company work together to supply electricity to customers across
Lower Michigan. The documents the independent transmission company had to absorb were currently housed in the basement of the parent company's headquarters and at about 150 electrical utility substations scattered across
Lower Michigan. Included were engineering drawings, inspection and maintenance histories, lists of stock items and spare parts, vendor information, guidelines involving wetlands and endangered species, and patrol maps.

The goal was to sort through all of the documents, convert what had to be retained to electronic files, and index those files in a searchable database. The effort would require a long-term paper storage and destruction solution and backup. Power companies typically make arrangements to buy power from other utilities to meet the load demand, so personnel were acquainted with the need for redundancy. Critical documents would need to be
stored electronically in at least two places.

Documents pertaining to wetlands and endangered species listed environmental factors such as the location of Indiana bat and bald eagle nesting sites. These needed to be considered when engineers and crews were working on construction or repair projects in certain areas. "At one of our sites, workers had to contact a fish and wildlife professor at the university to determine whether a bald eagle nest was empty," Wilson said.

Compliance and regulatory issues also needed to be identified and addressed, including standards established by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).

Additional challenges included labeling and categorizing information and developing a classification system that would ensure the right documents could be surfaced by users when needed. No form of classification currently existed.

Fact-Finding With Quality Tools

Considering the wide variety of documents to be transferred and aware of the many types of information they contained, Wilson knew he needed to start with a solid understanding of end user requirements. To get his arms around the project, he used a number of quality tools including process mapping and fishbone analyses.

He observed the work of engineers, control room personnel, and field technicians to learn more about their jobs and to map how they used drawings and other documents. When he saw documents being handled, he'd stop personnel and ask questions such as: What document did you just take out? What document did you just file? How did you use it? This helped him add details to the process map.

Wilson created the fishbone diagram in Figure 1 to help team members and stakeholders work more effectively with all of the details and disparate interests. The fishbone helped demonstrate what was needed to proceed, what support was available, and how to put the entire effort together. With the important goal of transferring all documents from the parent company as efficiently and effectively as possible, the fishbone, says Wilson, "was crucial in helping the team avoid stepping on toes, achieving compliance, and meeting quality checks."

Tradition vs. Innovation

Complicating matters was the reality that Wilson and his team were dealing with two different organizational cultures. The utility had roots stretching back to the 19th century, and the independent transmission company, one of only four in the country, was formed more than 100 years later in 2002.

"This meant we were working with two completely different
ways of doing things and trying to direct everyone toward a
common goal," Wilson said.

The effort involved a range of professionals, including nuclear
engineers and transmission distribution experts. Many of the specialists
and technicians who used the documents involved in the
project were accustomed to certain ways of working and weren't
enthusiastic about changing.

To aid the transition process, encourage cooperation, and create
buy-in, Wilson regularly met with stakeholders and employees
from both organizations to identify their respective needs and
objectives. He found that personnel from different areas such as
planning, construction, project management, the operations group,
and quality management brought different views to the project
and had their own opinions on what would be the best solution.

Some veteran utility workers felt more comfortable working
with physical drawings and documents, even though the newer
and more efficient way was to carry a laptop that would offer
access to all needed information. "Technicians were used to
walking around with drawings tucked under their arms, and we
were proposing something radically different," said Wilson.

Most control room specialists also wanted to have physical
drawings close at hand. To them, hard copies seemed more permanent
and authoritative, and they were reluctant to think about
having to verify information using a laptop.

Knowledge transfer was another challenge. "Most parent company
workers had decades of experience, so one of our goals was
capturing their know-how and making it available to the next
generation," Wilson recalled. "In some cases, we were looking
to put informative notations right on the drawings."

Retirement dates were studied and meetings held in an effort to
record information before an individual left the utility. In addition
to exit interviews covering process and technical expertise,
a 90-day, post-retirement window was established to continue
talking with retirees.

Planning the Solution

A three-pronged approach was proposed:

Temporary document storage in one physical location -
All 750,000 documents would be transported to one
location for scanning.

Document conversion and entry into a content
management system -The physical documents would be
scanned to create electronic versions, which would be
described and categorized upon checking in to the content
management system.

Establishing backup electronic documentation - An
electronic document holder in North Carolina was selected to
store backup electronic documentation. If the entire state of
Michigan were to lose power, backups of critical documents
would be available.

During the planning stages, Wilson and his team relied
heavily on simulations, especially for the complex task of
converting the documents. Many of the originals were more
than 80 years old, with some dating back to 1899, so reducing
handling prior to scanning would help protect the fragile
materials from damage.

Figure 2, the simulated document management process flow,
provides an overview of the steps involved in converting the
documents. Wilson mapped a workflow layout of approximately
8,000 square feet and projected the time required to move all
750,000 documents through the process. If four or five people
working in shifts covered 24 hours per day, he determined, sorting
and digitizing the documents and creating a cross-reference
would take 69 weeks. From there, he figured in time for breaks,
weekends, and holidays. Again, process mapping proved useful
in capturing critical details of the sorting and conversion process,
helping identify and address issues related to planning, financial
incentives, safety, and scheduling.

Based on the simulation, Wilson estimated that the immediate impact
on the bottom line would be a savings of $2,500 in the first year.

Building the Solution

Before any document conversion and storage could begin,
Wilson worked on establishing the classification system that
would make the documents accessible in searches. Because no
form of classification had been in use, Wilson first had to convince
stakeholders and the management team of the importance
of this step to an orderly turnover process and to long-term document
management.

Having learned of an earlier successful attempt to create a construction
list database, Wilson decided to use it as the basis for the new
system. He added classification fields to address key information
needs uncovered in his meetings with stakeholders, developing a
unified system that would work through the entire field.

In 2006, planning for the project was completed and a pilot
program conducted. Hardware was implemented, software
debugged, and personnel trained. Documents started arriving in
semi trucks, and scanning and indexing began.

As they digitized the documents, Wilson's team sought to enrich
each drawing. Although they were working on a deadline, they
recognized that converting physical drawings to electronic files
offered the opportunity to bring older drawings up to code and
add data such as inspection histories and instructions on locating
and accessing substations.

Beyond the conversion of the originals, the team was responsible
for destruction of documents that were outdated or no longer
needed, and for establishing a clear and accurate versioning process.
Crews in the field who were troubleshooting or working
on repairs, additions, or new installations needed to be assured
that they were accessing not only the correct drawing but also
the most appropriate version of that drawing-usually, but not
always, the most recent update.

The final step was to notify users of the data that were now
available to them and teach them how to find documents in the
new system. To close the feedback loop, the team developed
a recommender process. When users accessed drawings, they
could recommend additional information to record.

Signs of Success

As shown in Figure 3, full document turnover was completed by
December 2007. The primary focus in 2008 was on document
management, including making ongoing updates and revisions to
documents.

The project was also a financial success. Savings added up to
approximately $1.1 million in 2006, $1 million in 2007, $1.2
million in 2008, and $1.5 million in 2009. Further confirmation
of success came in 2009 when a competitor purchased the utility
and continued to use the document management program the
team developed.

Continuous improvement plans include more attention to the
versioning process. Fishbone analysis and process mapping have
again featured prominently in charting the way.

For More Information

Learn more about using quality tools for process management by
visiting www.asq.org/learn-about-quality/quality-tools.html.

Ted Schaar is a freelance writer who has written on quality topics
ranging from statistical process control to 5S. A graduate of the
University of Wisconsin-Madison, he resides in Brookfield, WI.

Reginald (Ray) Wilson is an industrial operations specialist with more than 20 years of electrical systems methodology and analytical process philosophy experience in the utility, defense,
and commercial electronic industries. He is also an adjunct
lecturer for Michigan's Ferris State University, Baker College,
and Grand Rapids Community College, teaching courses in
managerial business processes, circuit analysis, and electronic
instrumentation. An ASQ Certified Quality Process Analyst and
ASQ Certified Six Sigma Green Belt, Wilson holds a bachelor's
degree in engineering and a master's degree in industrial operations
from Lawrence Technological University in Southfield, MI.
He is an active member of the Institute for Operations Research
and the Management Sciences (INFORMS), the Institute of
Industrial Engineers, and ASQ.

The QMS Provider for the FDA

MasterControl Inc. and its partner, i4DM, are expanding their FDA project, serving as the QMS providers for a second FDA division. The two companies have been the QMS providers for the FDA's Office of Regulatory Affairs since 2009. Now they will also serve as quality providers for the Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis, which is part of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

Software Magazine ranks MasterControl 369 on its 2014 Software 500 list, a listing of the world's largest software and services providers. Now in its 32nd year, the Software 500 is a revenue-based ranking of vendor viability. Learn More